6.1.The University as the place of universal knowledge: Stein and Newman46

6.2.The difficult relationship with W. Stern and the Anders case47

6.3.Empathy and the objective spirit: Stein and Geiger52

6.4.On the power of meaning: phenomenology and language55

6.5.Phenomenological personalism and Trinitarian ontology. An appeal to
theologians57

7.With travelling companions59

FRANCESCA NODARO

The
expansion of the Gemeinschaft as a network of relations. From the other of the Other to the Other61

1.In community work, a style of
life61

2.Towards new beginning of Stein
studies66

3.Empathy as experience of the
different (estraneo) and maternity as its existential manifestation (estrinsecazione)68

4.The problem of the other in the
fifth Cartesian meditation of Husserl77

5.Towards a scientific community
(and not only scientific) in dialogue89

Beginning again from Edith Stein

The discovery of some unpublished manuscripts

SUSANNE BATZDORFF

Remembering
my beloved aunt Edith Stein, philosopher and saint91

HANNA-BARBARA GERL-FALKOVITZ

“It’s
exactly this kind of Metaphysics that is missing…” A first objective appraisal
of Edith Stein’s Endliches und ewiges Sein and a first ‘biographical’ project. A
recently discovered piece from 1947105

Thursday, 17 December 2015

FL suggested a
paper on the Trinity. I could not follow all of what he said, but this seems to
be it: most people begin with persons and go on to the three relations which
are persons. They tend to forget the relations of origin – which are two. These
are the intelligible emanations. This would not be so bad if it were not for
the fact that this governs most of what follows. “The hypothesis [which one?]
governs most of what follows.” Lonergan: about the most blessed Trinity: 4
relations, 3 persons, 2 emanations, 1 God, no understanding. Notional ??
something.

This probably in connection
with my remark that Ratzinger and Augustine / Thomas / Lonergan are asking
different questions.

Augustine: the
first person to come up with an analogy that is properly spiritual.

Remarks on Al
Ghazali: he respects reason, but also knows that one has to go beyond reason. Meaning?
[not supernatural but] that beyond reason there is love, the love of God.

About Heidegger.
Leo Strauss, being a Jew, said that H was the greatest philosopher of the 20th
century. Hannah Arendt and Hans Jonas found a way of forgiving and reconciling
with H: he did not know what he was doing.

H was ambitious as
a young man. he was small of stature, but he could, already when young, wrap
people around his little finger. He was the bright young thing as a Catholic
seminarian, chosen for ?? by his bishop.

He told Engelbert
Krebs: the system of Catholicism is something I cannot accept. But I do not
stop being Christian.

1919: the reading
of Augustine. He found all his key BT concepts in Augustine. The next year:
Aristotle. He said he found many things of Augustine in Arisottle, minus the
Christian context. So he found a way of pulling Augustine out of his Christian
context. That was BT.

Later he rejected
the transcendentalism of BT: Dasein was too much the centre. Man is more
receptive than at the centre. That is one of the reasons why he was unable to
apologize for his Nazi involvement.

Why did he go with
the Nazis? Because he had ambitions. One of them being that of being Plato’s
philosopher king. He hoped that by joining a political wagon, he might be able
to transform German education. In 3 months he was disillusioned. He went to a
meeting of top German educationalists, and found that they wanted something
completely different from what he wanted.

And John of St
Thomas / Deeley. Representationalist. Mirroring. They do not know the activity
of questioning and insight on the two levels. They place all their weight, the
weight of objectivity, on the representation, and they do it by trying to
reduce all the subjective side. That is why the phenomenologists reject them:
they neglect the intentionality side of things.